The Problems with Trans-ideology

[Vol8188]

I'm not saying you get angry about Happy Holidays, I'm saying the outrage is similar where if you acknowledge anything other than heterosexuality (or Christmas in my example), those people - who happen to be in the overwhelming majority that society has always catered to - claim they're "being attacked" and everyone else rolls their eyes

It’s a worthless distraction from the topic that you bring up for no reason other than to virtue signal and show you’re better those people. It would be like if I continually compared you to the people who believe there’s no biological differences in sex. Sure they exist. Sure they’re on your side and the Christmas crowd is on mine, but it serves no purpose other than to deflect.

 

[NashVol11]

Destroying vs disrupting, is there really a difference in that context?

If not, can you tell me what you believe they mean by their stated desire to “disrupt” the nuclear family?

Anyone who is attempting to promote a lesser alternative, we should all take issue with. The data on the importance of two parent households is incredibly solid.

How are two parent households being brought into this? Lol they're talking about supplementing the family with the surrounding community only if the parents are comfortable, and talking about involving parents in any and all BLM activities, and somehow you get "take one of the parents away"

 

[NashVol11]

It’s a worthless distraction from the topic that you bring up for no reason other than to virtue signal and show you’re better those people. It would be like if I continually compared you to the people who believe there’s no biological differences in sex. Sure they exist. Sure they’re on your side and the Christmas crowd is on mine, but it serves no purpose other than to deflect.

It's an example and an easy-to-understand one where as soon as a minority group gets a voice, the majority claims they're under attack. There are plenty of other examples, pick any minority group. Nothing about that is virtue signaling or claiming I'm better, though I do think those people elicit a lot of eyerolls as I already mentioned

 

[Vol8188]

How are two parent households being brought into this? Lol they're talking about supplementing the family with the surrounding community only if the parents are comfortable, and talking about involving parents in any and all BLM activities, and somehow you get "take one of the parents away"

You’re still avoiding the question. What does it mean when they say they want to disrupt the nuclear family? You just gave me a list of other things they support without addressing why they’d use a negative verb when describing their desires towards the nuclear family.

What do they mean by “disrupt the nuclear family” if not to “destroy”, “dismantle”, “lessen”, etc?

 

[NashVol11]

You’re still avoiding the question. What does it mean when they say they want to disrupt the nuclear family? You just gave me a list of other things they support without addressing why they’d use a negative verb when describing their desires towards the nuclear family.

What do they mean by “disrupt the nuclear family” if not to “destroy”, “dismantle”, “lessen”, etc?

The second sentence of the post you quoted answers this question, and so does their statement itself if you actually read the whole thing

 

[Vol8188]

It's an example and an easy-to-understand one where as soon as a minority group gets a voice, the majority claims they're under attack. There are plenty of other examples, pick any minority group. Nothing about that is virtue signaling or claiming I'm better, though I do think those people elicit a lot of eyerolls as I already mentioned

You’re just speaking in vague generalities to avoid the obvious issues.”they just want a voice!”. In todays society, I’m not sure any group lacks one. We could try speaking more specific if you’d like.

Why is there a need for books like gender queer that are marketed to elementary kids and depict homosexual sex acts?

Why is there a need to teach children falsehoods like “gender is one a spectrum”? Male/female is not a spectrum, but rather a binary. You also can’t proclaim “gender is a social construct” (gender roles are but not gender) and “gender is on a spectrum” given the majority of society’s do not accept the notion of endless genders (which they’d have to accept for both claims to be true)

 

[Vol8188]

The second sentence of the post you quoted answers this question, and so does their statement itself if you actually read the whole thing

It still doesn’t. Why “disrupt” something that’s optimal? If they desire to “disrupt” the nuclear family, that would imply the oppose the nuclear family.

You’ve yet to provide any reasonable explanation for that sentence on their website. The explanation is obvious. As they’ve admitted openly, the founders of blm were Marxists. Marxism in general opposes the nuclear family.

If what you’ve tried to say is true that they just want to support nuclear families and extended families, they wouldn’t need to make a statement about a desire to disrupt anything

 

[NashVol11]

You’re just speaking in vague generalities to avoid the obvious issues.”they just want a voice!”. In todays society, I’m not sure any group lacks one. We could try speaking more specific if you’d like.

Why is there a need for books like gender queer that are marketed to elementary kids and depict homosexual sex acts?

Flat wrong, it's an 18+ reading age

Why is there a need to teach children falsehoods like “gender is one a spectrum”? Male/female is not a spectrum, but rather a binary.

That's sex, not gender (and there are still people that fall outside of that binary too)

You also can’t proclaim “gender is a social construct” (gender roles are but not gender) and “gender is on a spectrum” given the majority of society’s do not accept the notion of endless genders (which they’d have to accept for both claims to be true)

Flat wrong again. The part in parentheses is something you made up entirely based on nothing.

Gender refers to the characteristics of women, men, girls and boys that are socially constructed. This includes norms, behaviours and roles associated with being a woman, man, girl or boy, as well as relationships with each other. As a social construct, gender varies from society to society and can change over time.

 

[Vol8188]

Flat wrong, it's an 18+ reading age



That's sex, not gender (and there are still people that fall outside of that binary too)



Flat wrong again. The part in parentheses is something you made up entirely based on nothing.

Let’s start with your first claim of “18+”, this is from the publicly director for the book “we are doing the most we can to ensure it is available to any and all who want to read it”…not any and all adults. It’s also very well documented to have been in many middle school libraries. As the NYT article here makes reference too in the screenshot. To be completely fair I can find no example of elementary, but it’s for sure being pushed for more than just the “18+ crowd”. Fairfax county schools originally pulled the book and then reinstated it.

The idea that sex/gender are/should be separate is a very new notion rooted in left wing philosophy. It actually started with well known pedophile John Money. Yes, there’s people who don’t fit many norms, that doesn’t mean we should teach small children about all of them.

The part in parenthesis is the simple logical conclusion. If something is a “social construct” than you should look at society to see how they define that. Most societies define gender not on a spectrum but rather as a binary. There are some exceptions to that, but I know of no society that teaches the idea of gender on a spectrum. So you can’t proclaim it’s both a societal construct and on a spectrum if that’s not how societies define their own construct

 

[BreatheUT]

You wear rainbow clothes or something? You seem upset over this

It should be his choice if he's in the community but you're right that it is no excuse for him to be triggered.

 

[Franklin Pierce]

Half of England ladies' angling team quit after Trans woman 'with hands like shovels' and who used to be a rugby player is selected to join their squad for physically demanding fishing championship

Half of the England ladies' angling team have quit in protest after a trans woman was selected to join the squad for a major competition, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

Three members of the six-strong squad stepped down after Becky Lee Birtwhistle Hodges, who was born male, was named for next month's physically challenging Home Nations shore fishing championship.

There has been opposition to former rugby player Birtwhistle Hodges competing with England since 2018, when she was first selected, with suggestions that other nations snub the team over claims that her strength advantage is unfair.

The sport of shore angling requires competitors to battle against strong winds and currents.

The trans angler, who one former team-mate described as having 'hands like shovels', was the only member of the team to catch any fish during a competition in rough weather earlier this year that was held by governing body the Angling Trust to select the final England team.

Half of England ladies' angling team quit after trans woman is selected to join their squad | Daily Mail Online

 

[NashVol11]

Let’s start with your first claim of “18+”, this is from the publicly director for the book “we are doing the most we can to ensure it is available to any and all who want to read it”…not any and all adults. It’s also very well documented to have been in many middle school libraries. As the NYT article here makes reference too in the screenshot. To be completely fair I can find no example of elementary, but it’s for sure being pushed for more than just the “18+ crowd”. Fairfax county schools originally pulled the book and then reinstated it.

Elementary schools would have surprised me. It's 15+ on Barnes and Noble and I'm not freaking out about it

The idea that sex/gender are/should be separate is a very new notion rooted in left wing philosophy. It actually started with well known pedophile John Money. Yes, there’s people who don’t fit many norms, that doesn’t mean we should teach small children about all of them.

This seems like nothing but ambiguous innuendo.

The part in parenthesis is the simple logical conclusion. If something is a “social construct” than you should look at society to see how they define that. Most societies define gender not on a spectrum but rather as a binary. There are some exceptions to that, but I know of no society that teaches the idea of gender on a spectrum. So you can’t proclaim it’s both a societal construct and on a spectrum if that’s not how societies define their own construct

We are a society. It's not a poll of all the societies in the world. That seems like something you made up and I know you saw the article saying the exact opposite.

 

[NashVol11]

Race is a social construct too. Is that because every society in the world defines race the exact way we do? Where did that even come from

 

[Vol8188]

Race is a social construct too. Is that because every society in the world defines race the exact way we do? Where did that even come from

You seem to just be deflecting from any actual issue. You try to tell me sex/gender are different and I explain to you that line of thought came from one of the creepiest lefties ever in the mid to late 1950s.

No, societies can and do have different definitions of race. Which is exactly my point. If something is a social construct, the definition of that construct is decided by society.

Which is why it’s contradictory to say that it’s definitely on a spectrum and that it’s a societal construct. You can say “it’s on a societal construct and I wish more people would accept it as being on a spectrum” but the obvious truth here is that’s not how most societies define it.

 

[Vol8188]

Elementary schools would have surprised me. It's 15+ on Barnes and Noble and I'm not freaking out about it



This seems like nothing but ambiguous innuendo.



We are a society. It's not a poll of all the societies in the world. That seems like something you made up and I know you saw the article saying the exact opposite.

Middle school starts around 10-11. Do you think that’s an appropriate age? And do you have nothing to say about the publisher saying the book is for all?

What exactly in the second part are you disagreeing with? John Money, extremely creepy, is who started the idea that these are two separate words. Historically they are not.

The last part I’ve already responded in the above post to in detail. Society defines social constructs. Therefore we should look to societies to define it. Societies overwhelmingly understand the obvious truth here that there’s two of them

 

[McDad]

Washington Judge Orders female-only spa with compulsory nudity to admit Transgender Women With Penises, after owner said facility was for 'biological women only' and pre-op trans activist complained

A women's spa, where nudity is compulsory, has been ordered by a judge to admit pre-op trans women with penises after an activist complained when the owner tried to ban them.

Trans woman Haven Wilvich's membership application for the Korean spa was declined. She alleged the spa told her 'transgender women without surgery are not welcome' and complained to the commission.

The family-owned spa, which has a branch on the outskirts of Seattle and one in Tacoma, is modeled on Jjimjilbang - sex-segregated bath houses in Korea - and offers monthly memberships and day passes.

Haven Wilvich, pictured, had applied to join the spa but was denied. Olympus Spa offers memberships and day passes

Washington women's spa with compulsory nudity is ordered by judge to start admitting trans women | Daily Mail Online

McRib and I went to one of these when we were in Washington last year. Very relaxing place. You aren't nude the whole time. But in the pool and hot tub it is segregated by gender and nude is compulsory. Some people go in there with their kids. There's no way a trans lady with a penis would be welcomed on the female side. A trans lady with breasts and penis would not be welcome on the Male side either.

 

[Vol8188]

It still doesn’t. Why “disrupt” something that’s optimal? If they desire to “disrupt” the nuclear family, that would imply the oppose the nuclear family.

You’ve yet to provide any reasonable explanation for that sentence on their website. The explanation is obvious. As they’ve admitted openly, the founders of blm were Marxists. Marxism in general opposes the nuclear family.

If what you’ve tried to say is true that they just want to support nuclear families and extended families, they wouldn’t need to make a statement about a desire to disrupt anything

@NashVol11 no response here?

 

[NashVol11]

You seem to just be deflecting from any actual issue. You try to tell me sex/gender are different and I explain to you that line of thought came from one of the creepiest lefties ever in the mid to late 1950s.

Madison Bentley had already defined gender as the socialized obverse of sex in 1945 and Money built that out, so that's a lie too. Beyond that, saying an entire line of thinking is nefarious because there is one (1) controversial person associated with it is absolutely insane, which is my point you apparently missed. It's tabloid-level innuendo.

No, societies can and do have different definitions of race. Which is exactly my point. If something is a social construct, the definition of that construct is decided by society.

Which is why it’s contradictory to say that it’s definitely on a spectrum and that it’s a societal construct. You can say “it’s on a societal construct and I wish more people would accept it as being on a spectrum” but the obvious truth here is that’s not how most societies define it.

"Most societies" have nothing to do with this. I don't know how many times you are going to keep pretending like that idea came from anything other than you making things up as you go, but I'll be here when you get tired of it.

 

[NashVol11]

@NashVol11 no response here?

I've responded to this like 3 times already lol, you prefer to act like their statement is 2 words long when the words are right there. Similar to the way the meaning of "social construct" is everywhere and you keep repeating the opposite instead

 

[Vol8188]

Madison Bentley had already defined gender as the socialized obverse of sex in 1945 and Money built that out, so that's a lie too. Beyond that, saying an entire line of thinking is nefarious because there is one (1) controversial person associated with it is absolutely insane, which is my point you apparently missed. It's tabloid-level innuendo.



"Most societies" have nothing to do with this. I don't know how many times you are going to keep pretending like that idea came from anything other than you making things up as you go, but I'll be here when you get tired of it.

You’re focusing on the wrong thing. The important part isn’t the problems around Money, but rather you’re openly admitting I’m right that gender/sex are the same. The idea they should be separate is a very new distinction from left wing academics.

I’m not making anything up. Idk how you fail to see this. If gender is a social construct as you claim, then it is something that is defined by those societies.

Your claim: gender is made up by societies
My counter: then it is also defined by societies

Seems very obvious. Yet I fail to name any societies that historically define gender as a spectrum and even if you can find 1 or 2 of those that would make it the exception, not the rule.

You can claim you’d prefer society to view gender as being on spectrum, that would be fine. But if it’s a social construct, then you should look at how society defines it

 

[NashVol11]

Middle school starts around 10-11. Do you think that’s an appropriate age? And do you have nothing to say about the publisher saying the book is for all?

It's not marketed to middle schools and you had to screenshot an NYT article to find one example. Not every student can check out every book in a library either. It takes like 7 different layers of boogeymen for someone to honestly believe heterosexuals are "under attack," which remains extremely whiny to me.

What exactly in the second part are you disagreeing with? John Money, extremely creepy, is who started the idea that these are two separate words. Historically they are not.

The last part I’ve already responded in the above post to in detail. Society defines social constructs. Therefore we should look to societies to define it. Societies overwhelmingly understand the obvious truth here that there’s two of them

I responded to this already.

 

[Vol8188]

I've responded to this like 3 times already lol, you prefer to act like their statement is 2 words long when the words are right there. Similar to the way the meaning of "social construct" is everywhere and you keep repeating the opposite instead

What’s the meaning of social construct?

Their statement is self evident. Known Marxist. Marxist oppose the nuclear family as upholding capitalism. They clearly say they wish to “disrupt” the nuclear family. You’re trying to claim they don’t oppose the nuclear family. If so, simply define disrupt as they’re using it in that sentence. It shouldn’t be hard.

 

[Vol8188]

It's not marketed to middle schools and you had to screenshot an NYT article to find one example.

Lmao are you taking a shot at me for not spending enough time in middle school libraries? Sorry, I can’t name every book in a middle school library without help.

 

[NashVol11]

You’re focusing on the wrong thing. The important part isn’t the problems around Money, but rather you’re openly admitting I’m right that gender/sex are the same. The idea they should be separate is a very new distinction from left wing academics.

Great point. Every new thought we've had since 1950 is too new, and the answer is to live in 1940 where gender and sex are the same and Black people don't have rights. Integration is a very new distinction from left wing academics so it's therefore wrong.

I’m not making anything up. Idk how you fail to see this. If gender is a social construct as you claim, then it is something that is defined by those societies.

Your claim: gender is made up by societies
My counter: then it is also defined by societies

Seems very obvious. Yet I fail to name any societies that historically define gender as a spectrum and even if you can find 1 or 2 of those that would make it the exception, not the rule.

You can claim you’d prefer society to view gender as being on spectrum, that would be fine. But if it’s a social construct, then you should look at how society defines it

This can't be a serious conversation lol. We in and of ourselves are a society and the appeal to "most" or the rest of the world is something you're inventing, then just saying "seems obvious" with zero other sources because you apparently want to prove my point over and over

 

[NashVol11]

Lmao are you taking a shot at me for not spending enough time in middle school libraries? Sorry, I can’t name every book in a middle school library without help.

?? A person incentivized to do so couldn't find ANY examples of it being "marketed to elementary schools" and ONE example in the country of it being present in a middle school library within which it could easily be restricted (skipping past every other controversy revolving around a high school) and immediately starts with the "what about the 10 year olds". I'm saying that's stupid.